Monthly Brief for October: 8 Quasi-predictions on Election 2020
I review my election coverage over the campaign season. Pretty dang good, if I do say so myself.
On Tuesday (Election Day) morning, I told my wife:
I’m 85% sure we won’t have a winner declared tonight, I’m 70% sure we won’t have a winner declared tomorrow (Wednesday) night, and I’d give Biden a 55/45 chance of winning.
That’s as close as I generally come to making political predictions. And, as I’m writing this, that prediction was largely accurate.
It got me thinking. What other quasi-predictions about this election did I make in the course of 2020? So, for this October monthly brief (intentionally delayed until post election), I’m going to assess how I did in my analysis of the 2020 Election.
Prediction 1: The Trump Strategy
My claim
In the May 15 Weekly Brief, I laid out what I thought would be the broad contours of President Trump’s attack on Biden:
I think the general strategy against Biden and Democrats for November is taking shape and will run along the following lines:
Democrat-led states have had the worst outbreaks, enforced lockdowns the longest, and done the most damage to the economy.
Dems in Congress ignored the spiraling economy to push for massive pork barrel spending, ballooning the national debt.
Biden’s on record saying if president he would essentially do more of these lockdowns.
China needs to be held responsible for this pandemic and Biden has been and will be too soft on Beijing.
At this point, Biden’s poor health and the Tara Reade allegations are helpful tactical distractions indicating a general unfitness for office, which will pivot to attacks on a VP pick..
My assessment
I was largely right about the Covid-related stuff, and exit polls indicated voters were paying attention to the pandemic and policies related to it. However, GOP-led states bore the brunt of the second wave of infections in the fall, making the first point of attack difficult to maintain.
Certainly the breakdown in negotiations over another round of economic stimulus lent credence to the the second point of attack, and Biden stayed on message about tougher measures, biting into the third point of attack. So, while I might have called those lines of attack correctly, they may have lost their persuasive power down the stretch.
China and the Tara Reade allegations went AWOL throughout the election. But, like I noted, they were tactical moves that would pivot to other attacks. I nailed that one, particularly when it came to the VP pick.
I am surprised China did not stay more front and center in this campaign, but it may be that both candidates concluded they couldn’t win with China in the spotlight.
Prediction 2: The close election
My claim
In the July 10 newsletter, and many newsletters thereafter, I started reporting on the narratives being spun off of polling reports:
The narrative, and the polls, indicating the growing strength of the Biden campaign continued to hold this week. As convention season rolls around, and the VP hunt narrows the list of candidates, the Democrats are feeling pretty good about their chances in November.
Vox trumpets the formation of a progressive platform as Biden and Sanders join forces on outlining policy, and National Review notes the unrelenting media barrage on Trump.
With his base consolidated and his flank protected, Biden seems to be in a good starting position.
However, I also started noting underreported findings indicating this would be a tighter race against a different GOP:
And while he seems to be on the ropes, Trump is also working at consolidating his base, and seems to have achieved that. Gallup reports that Trump’s job approval rating has the largest partisan gap in history, his overall approval numbers seem to have bottomed out in the low 40s, which is more of a return to “normal.” So, despite the absolute beating Trump has taken over the last month, the polls indicate that it may not be quite the beating the talking heads crowd claims. And there’s one other thing Trump has going for him: incumbency.
A final note, and not much reported, but the GOP is running a large number of women in Congressional races this year, and Republican Senators are moving to make Juneteenth a national holiday. It’ll be interesting to see how this shapes the election if at all.
My assessment
I’m happy to say I freakin’ nailed this. The election turned out way closer than pollsters and progressive media predicted, and I was able to recognize that the reports of shifting demographics in the GOP Congressional races signaled a shift in the GOP that has since fully materialized.
Prediction 3: The unpredictable voters
My claim
In my August 7 newsletter I cited a series of polls not related to the election, but to different aspects of life in America and said the following about the American voter:
What does all of this mean, especially for the upcoming election? Well, don’t rule out anything (it’s 2020 after all), but when I see these poll numbers, I’m seeing the average American voter having a deep sense of something being wrong in America, not trusting key informational institutions, and becoming increasingly willing to rely on themselves to care for their families.
If anything, the current state of affairs is exposing that governing elites (particularly on the political Left) are more out of step with average Americans since 2016, not less. Put another way, despite leading in the (narrowing) polls, Team Biden may be misreading cultural cues, investing the VP pick with ever greater significance.
My assessment
Again, I think I got this one largely right. As I noted in my post-election podcast, the American people are returning a divided government to Washington. Why? Because they don’t fully trust either party to hold their best interests in mind when making policy. That turn towards self-reliance signaled a fundamentally conservative turn, which showed up down ballot races, and the outcome of the election proves that the political Left was/is out of step with the average American, which ultimately denied the Democrats full control of government.
Prediction 4: The weak VP
My claim
Throughout the summer, I made the point that Biden’s VP pick would be a unique point of attack for Trump. And Kamala Harris certainly came in for her share of vitriol:
August 14:
But will Harris help the ticket outside the committed Democratic base? That remains to be seen. Harris brings acknowledged talent to the table, but critics note her lack of follow through at critical points in her own presidential campaign, her lack of appeal outside the base (and potentially inside the base too), and her aggressive support of radical progressive policies (Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, etc.). On the foreign policy front, Harris seems to tack close to Biden’s positions like reentering the Paris Climate Accords and the JCPOA.
Like much in this election, it’s too early to tell if Harris will help or hurt the Biden campaign, but one thing seems certain, and that’s Harris’ position as a harbinger of changes in the Democratic Party.
Trump seems to smell blood in the water or he’s panicking (depends on who you ask), but the President’s campaign kicked into high gear, attacking the “radical left” agenda of the Biden-Harris ticket and hinting at potential economic policy changes if reelected.
And on August 21:
The cracks in the Democratic coalition are still there and Kamala Harris’ addition to the ticket ensures that they’ll remain, leaving some wondering if the Party can hold together through this election and on the other side of it.
My assessment
I stopped short of saying Harris would drag down the ticket, so I can’t say I predicted much with Harris. However, she certainly doesn’t seem to have given Biden any boost beyond fundraising, which, given GOP gains in Congress will make the discussion on the future of the Democratic Party an interesting one.
Prediction 5: The realignment
My claim
I’m not the first observer to note that this election appeared to be a realignment, but I think I was one of the few that was tracking the contours of that realignment as I developed it in September:
The increasingly fraught electioneering is taking place against a backdrop of several shifts in the voting populace, any one of which could shift an election in a “normal” election year.
Minnesota, long a blue state, appears ready to flip amid continuing protesting and rioting in Minneapolis and nearby Wisconsin. The perception of dangerous cities has observers noting a return to the suburbs for many, which could spell further election trouble for Democrats who traditionally enjoy urban support, or it could spell trouble for Republicans as suburban areas turn purple or blue.
The labor movement, another Democrat stalwart, seems to be splitting in this election as well as first the national police union endorsed Trump, then came under fire from other unions for doing so.
Gallup reports a widening gap between black voters and the Democratic Party on abortion issues, which could peel away votes.
In a traditionally Republican enclave, polls show active duty military generally supporting Biden over Trump.
What’s the point? The political parties, like the country they seek to lead, are in flux. This is what a realignment looks like, and it’s fairly normal (though uncomfortable). It just happens to be happening at a particularly high stakes moment.
And again on September 11:
Beneath the surface, though, there’s a lot of data points pointing to the realignment I mentioned earlier, which could easily skew poll results:
Libertarians considering voting for Trump should he pardon Edward Snowden.
Scott Pruit and the EPA following through on aggressively cleaning up toxic waste sites around the country, including in formerly blue collar, blue voter regions.
FiveThirtyEight reporting Trump’s numbers are holding steady with college-educated whites, Hispanic, and black voters. Some polls suggest improvements on those numbers in key states.
Biden’s lack of appeal to Hispanic voters was a story in at least three different sources I follow this week, leading me to conclude that this isn’t a small issue.
Following the lead of the NYC police union, the Chicago police union endorsed Trump.
Any one of those data points could shift the outcome in several different states.
My assessment
I think it's safe to say with the mixed bag of election results for both parties, the realignment is here to stay. We’re just going to be coming to terms with it now.
Prediction 6: The accidental GOP wave
My claim
On September 18, I accidentally tripped over the coming GOP gains in the House:
Despite their message of inclusion and identity, Democrats may be missing some significant segments of voters, something the GOP is not ignoring as House Republicans rolled out their pitch to the American electorate.
My assessment
This was not a prediction made in any confidence. It was one of those funny feelings one gets when seeing two interesting data points emerge at the same time. I take no credit for it from a prediction standpoint, but I put it here to note that the possibility of GOP gains in the House was right in front of me. I just didn’t have enough imagination to see it.
Prediction 7: A non-controversial election
Also on September 18, I noted that a close election in the midst of realignment would not automatically mean fraud:
Any one of the issues noted above could swing a close election (and this is likely to be a close one) one way or another without any foul play, so it is premature, immature, and generally foolish to be anticipating foul play from the other side before the election. In fact, most of the factors listed above are normal elements of national elections.
Rather than anticipating the worst, a more levelheaded response would be to adjust our expectations. Most Americans anticipate knowing the winner on election night. That won’t happen, and it won’t be due to foul play. It’ll be due to a lot of mail-in ballots coming in, a ton of recounts and election litigation, and state election officials using the time the Supreme Court has given them to get the count as right as possible.
And on October 16:
Speaking personally, my hope is that the shift towards voter patience in awaiting the outcome, coupled with highly visible moments of partisan civility will have a calming effect on all of us in the immediate election aftermath.
My assessment
I think events of this week are bearing my analysis out here. It was a close election and a lot of cross cutting realignments are making the close election tallies appear fishy. Better to sit tight before alleging fraud.
Prediction 8: The bad polls
My claim
It’s hilarious to watch everyone going off on the bad polling now, when just a couple weeks ago, the polling was practically Divine revelation to read some reporting. On October 23, I noted the potential problems with predicting from polling:
Right now, FiveThirtyEight is giving Trump a 12% chance of winning based on their modeling (and it's very robust). However, when I chose Trump to win Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, Georgia and Mississippi, Trump’s reelection chances went up to 70%. Switch out Minnesota and Pennsylvania and Trump's chances stand at 43%. In other words, the polls that are showing a commanding Biden lead, or the possibility of a Biden win in some of the southern states are really skewing the odds. Now, you might be thinking, Trump winning Pennsylvania is unlikely, but Biden’s lead there slipped 5 points in two weeks.
The American Conservative goes so far as to argue that the polls are actually obscuring reality, namely, that Trump is leading. The Manhattan Institute takes a more measured tone, arguing that a Trump win would have to result from another round of favorable polling errors.
So, what could the polls be missing? They could be miscalculating the motivation of voters, the resulting turnout, and who that turnout would favor. Additionally, the polls are focused on the candidates, but other polls are showing a persistently steady job approval for President Trump, and a slim majority supporting the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett.
All that to say, or rather repeat, go easy on making predictions off of the polling data. Most polls say it's Biden’s race to lose, but there’s others that are saying the opposite.
My assessment
This was perhaps the easiest prediction to make. Polls hadn’t had a good showing in 2016, and given the flux and craziness of 2020, there was no good reason to believe that they’d be any better.
How’d I do?
Overall, I’m really happy with my record on my quasi-predictions. I don’t do this so much to give myself a pat on the back as to demonstrate to you, my reader, a couple of things.
This is why you need to read a variety of sources. Note how often I’m citing multiple sources from different political perspectives. It’s that composite picture that I think is more accurate.
I value your readership and want you to know that I take getting you an accurate picture of the world seriously.
If you find this analysis helpful, compelling, or trustworthy, I’d like to invite you to become a subscriber to the Weekly Brief. You’ll receive more analysis like this on a weekly basis on a wide range of issues. I look forward to continue sharing my insights with you!